• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Russia may send spacecraft to knock away asteroid

The biggest problem with the Russian's plan is that while the object's orbit is still in doubt, any action they take to change its orbit could end up making things worse and not better. The chance of that happening are very small, but they're still there. On the other hand, if it was going to hit us, the earlier we act, the better, so it's sort of a 'damned if you do and damned if you don't' situation. Russia has much more incentive to do something about it than we do as well, since the projected course across earth's orbit carries it over most of Russia. The US is not in it's path, so we have less reason to do anything about it.
 
And if I may ask since I respect your opinion, would you use to apply said inertia?---Bombs or rockets? --or something else.

Neither, a simple application of kinetic energy is enough. The problem with bombs/rockets is that they are more likely to shatter the asteroid without changing trajectory of some of the matter.
 
Neither, a simple application of kinetic energy is enough. The problem with bombs/rockets is that they are more likely to shatter the asteroid without changing trajectory of some of the matter.
OK, so how would you go about applying it. It does need to be applied, correct?
 
OK, so how would you go about applying it. It does need to be applied, correct?

Just an impact by an object, lets say a rocket, with enough kinetic energy (not explosive power) to alter the trajectory slighty. Or, on the slower side, something equivalent to a remote contolled tugboat.

At such vast distances with so many forces acting on objects in space, only a slight shift in trajectory is necessary.
 
Might as well throw all of our garbage on that asteroid while we're at it, starting with all of the existing copies of Windows Vista.
 
Might as well throw all of our garbage on that asteroid while we're at it, starting with all of the existing copies of Windows Vista.

Agreed. But what would happen if the ball of garbage came back to earth a thousand years into the future?
 
Agreed. But what would happen if the ball of garbage came back to earth a thousand years into the future?
So 1000 years from now humanity would re-discover windows vista.
Ummm... you're right, it'd be better to get hit by the asteroid.
 
Just an impact by an object, lets say a rocket, with enough kinetic energy (not explosive power) to alter the trajectory slighty. Or, on the slower side, something equivalent to a remote contolled tugboat.

At such vast distances with so many forces acting on objects in space, only a slight shift in trajectory is necessary.
I see your point. Would it be very hard to control the impact, so as to get the exact redirection desired, or will just any hit from the rocket do the job? And what would the new orbit do, on it's next orbit? Would it bring the Asteroid even closer on it's next path? ---Would maybe attaching rocket engines to the asteroid, allow us to actually maneuver the asteroid in a controlled manner? and to make minor adjustments as needed. ---I'm not very good with this stuff, so was just asking.
 
I see your point. Would it be very hard to control the impact, so as to get the exact redirection desired, or will just any hit from the rocket do the job? And what would the new orbit do, on it's next orbit? Would it bring the Asteroid even closer on it's nest path? Would maybe attaching rocket engines to the asteroid, allow us to actually maneuver the asteroid in a controlled manner? and to make minor adjustments as needed. ---I'm not very good with this stuff, so was just asking.

Not very, given a proper application of physics - the new orbit would probably have the goal of slingshotting said asteroid out of Terran orbit.

I am also not a physicist, so I don't understand the specifics; merely the theory behind it. ;)
 
Not very, given a proper application of physics - the new orbit would probably have the goal of slingshotting said asteroid out of Terran orbit.

I am also not a physicist, so I don't understand the specifics; merely the theory behind it. ;)
Your doing a fine job. at least you have a plan. but as with the 2029 comet, or asteroid, it will pass us by this trip, but the next one won't be so nice. ---My memory is not so great. I hope I have those dates right. I forget it's next arrival.---I must research. I'll get back to ya, when I have something. Be well.
 
Here we go then--just what nobody wants to see---

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BBsyQ8Gli_Q"]YouTube- Doomsday Asteroid : Apophis to hit Earth 2029-2036 Scientists Warn[/ame]
 
It is clear from reading just a few posts from really uninformed people they don't understand how calculations of a possible impact with earth are made, which is where the odds of an actual impart are derived.

The Russians have a few very intelligent scientists but their over all technology and equipment is severely lacking in many fields. They are just as likely to move this Asteroid into a more dangerous orbit. I would therefore like to see a joint cooperative effort taking place if they are going to mess with something that presents NO EMINENT DANGER.

Keep in mind that many Asteroids are not solid objects but a cluster of loosely connected fragments made up of any number of smaller objects and not knowing precisely what you're dealing with could be dangerous or even fatal to all life on Earth if broken apart into what could be like a shot gun blast style impact.

Too many variables and unknown information to be going off half cocked as scientists often do.

It's like the Hadron Collider only having a very remote possibility of creating a black hole that would eventually eat the earth, and yet they are going ahead with it. I would think that if there is any chance Governments would act to put an end to any thing until they could assure there was no risk. But Scientists will always error on the side of being wackos first and logical and safety second.
 
Last edited:
things in Nature, have a pattern, that has worked for trillions of years. All we have to do, is ride the wave when it gets here. and not try and rush the river. Everything in it's own time.
 
What on earth has the capability of moving a 250 meter wide rock?

A hundred pound or so "probe" could be sent just ahead of the asteroid and be maneuvered with jets to slowly change the course of the Asteroid after a few years. This uses gravity to draw the asteroid on a course we would want.

A "probe" could land on the asteroid and with occasional jets of gas could maneuver the asteroid.

We could send a "probe" to the asteroid the would orbit the asteroid and would have a laser on it and would vaporise bits of the rock causing ejecta causing a change of course.

those are just three for a asteroid that size.
 
What's the frequency of lightnings?
Now what's the frequency of Asteroids around Earth?

And given the frequency of lightning strikes and the fact that there are nearly seven BILLION people on this earth, of course people will get struck when the odds are one in six hundred thousand. However, while there are seven BILLION people, where is only ONE earth. Talk about making irrelevant comparisons.
 
Back
Top Bottom